What it boils down to is that Breyer doesn't give a rat's patoot about the constitution. That puts him in league with the left whose goal is to undermine the constitution so that the state becomes the giver (and taker) of rights.
Although the devil is in the details, protecting minority rights is, in and of itself, a worthy effort. But Breyer is saying the court should PROMOTE minority rights, and to do that the court must step around the constitution, he says. He's right about that, but wrong that it should be done. Promoting one group's rights over another's is unconstitutional and extremely detrimental to the country. The correct observation would have been to make this distinction.
A modest correction.